About: R v Prosper

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- Rule:
- Inverse Functional Properties:
- "Same As":

About: R v Prosper Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase, within Data Space : dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon

http://dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org%2Fresource%2FR_v_Prosper&invfp=IFP_OFF&sas=SAME_AS_OFF

R v Prosper, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 236 is a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the right to duty counsel upon arrest or detainment by police under section 10(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Court found that merely reading the accused his or her rights is insufficient to discharge the right to counsel; the police must also provide the accused with access to legal aid or duty counsel. At trial Prosper successfully argued that Breathalyzer results were taken in violation of his Charter rights to counsel under section 10(b).

Attributes	Values
rdf:type	Supreme Court of the United States case
rdfs:label	R v Prosper (en)
rdfs:comment	R v Prosper, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 236 is a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the right to duty counsel upon arrest or detainment by police under section 10(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Court found that merely reading the accused his or her rights is insufficient to discharge the right to counsel; the police must also provide the accused with access to legal aid or duty counsel. At trial Prosper successfully argued that Breathalyzer results were taken in violation of his Charter rights to counsel under section 10(b). (en)
dcterms:subject	1994 in Canadian case law Supreme Court of Canada cases Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms case law Canadian criminal procedure case law
Wikipage page ID	4525819 (xsd:integer)
Wikipage revision ID	903599736 (xsd:integer)
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage	Duty counsel 1994 in Canadian case law Breathalyzer Legal aid List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Lamer Court) Supreme Court of Canada cases Supreme Court of Canada Arrest Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms case law Canadian criminal procedure case law Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section Twenty-four of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section Ten of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
sameAs	R v Prosper R v Prosper R v Prosper
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate	dbt:Canada-law-stub dbt:SCCInfoBox dbt:Lexum-scc2
Dissent	L'Heureux‑Dubé J. (en) Major J. (en) La Forest J. (en) Gonthier J. (en)
docket	23178 (xsd:integer)
JoinMajority	Sopinka, Cory and Iacobucci JJ. (en)
citations	[1994] 3 S.C.R. 236 (en)
majority	Lamer C.J. (en)
has abstract	R v Prosper, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 236 is a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the right to duty counsel upon arrest or detainment by police under section 10(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Court found that merely reading the accused his or her rights is insufficient to discharge the right to counsel; the police must also provide the accused with access to legal aid or duty counsel. Cyril Prosper was pulled over by the police for driving erratically. The police noticed that he was severely inebriated and arrested him. They read him his rights and provided him access to a telephone and telephone directory to call a lawyer. He declined to call a lawyer in private practice as he said he could not afford it. He then agreed to take a Breathalyzer test. At trial Prosper successfully argued that Breathalyzer results were taken in violation of his Charter rights to counsel under section 10(b). The question before the Supreme Court was first, whether section 10(b) of the Charter imposes a substantive constitutional obligation on governments to ensure that duty counsel is available upon arrest or detention to provide free and immediate preliminary legal advice upon request. Second, whether the evidence should be excluded under section 24(2) of the Charter as it would bring the administration of justice into disrepute. The court unanimously held that the Charter does not impose an obligation to ensure duty counsel is available upon arrest. In a five to three decision the Court held that the evidence should be excluded. (en)
case-name	R v Prosper (en)
Concurrence	McLachlin J. (en)
decided-date	1994-09-29 (xsd:date)
full-case-name	Cyril Patrick Prosper v Her Majesty The Queen (en)
heard-date	0001-03-02 (xsd:gMonthDay)
SCC	1994 (xsd:integer)
gold:hypernym	Decision
prov:wasDerivedFrom	wikipedia-en:R_v_Prosper?oldid=903599736&ns=0
page length (characters) of wiki page	2620 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf	wikipedia-en:R_v_Prosper
is Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage of	R v Bartle 1994 reasons of the Supreme Court of Canada List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Lamer Court) Reasons of the Supreme Court of Canada by Chief Justice Lamer R. v. Prosper
is Wikipage redirect of	R. v. Prosper
is foaf:primaryTopic of	wikipedia-en:R_v_Prosper

Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git139 as of Feb 29 2024

Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3330 as of Mar 19 2024, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc212), Single-Server Edition (378 GB total memory, 52 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software